The current www.nhs.uk website may not look pretty and is a bit messy in the way it's organised, but it's a real goldmine of health information.
Plus, you can trust that it's written by qualified medical practitioners.
I really hope the GDS team can make the new NHS site as simple, clear and easy to use as gov.uk.
Slight digression: I'm always a little annoyed when Google gives livestrong.com top billing in their search results when you search for a medical condition. I can understand that people outside the UK might prefer livestrong.com, but I think most UK web users (using Google UK) would consider the NHS website as more reliable and appropriate than livestrong.
By "do" the NHS I meant the whole interactive system, not just providing information.
User interaction, booking appointments, reading case notes etc, sharing data between medical staff, the big ugly monster that scuppered the previous attempt. Was it really £14b wasted? [0]
I wish them all the best!
Regarding the the NHS information; this has always impressed me. They put a date on each page when it was last reviewed, and when it is next due to be reviewed. I keep wanting to do this on the websites I work on, if I only I could get beyond maintenance.
> I think most UK web users (using Google UK) would consider the NHS website as more reliable and appropriate than livestrong.
It is strange, as there have long been rumoured to be manual tweaks within Google search that say, for instance, BBC iPlayer radio will always come on top of a search for radio. You'd think there would be even more reason for the same to exist for health information.
